Patent of troll
- Mark: clever of troll get a plumb line of attention, but they ares the biggest problem.
"clever troll" is a term for companies that acquire patent for the pure pose of extracting money from product developers. They thus injury the economy, make business less efficient, make some types of business too expensive for small businesses and clog up the legally system.
A narrower term is non-practising entity (NPE), which denotes a sub-category of clever of troll whose only activity in a domain is clever trolling. One definition of NPE is "an entity that does not have the capabilities to design, manufacture, or distribute products that have features [covered] by the patent". 
 Who Th they injury fruit juice?
Patent of troll ares generally a problem for free software projects, although a generous software company could Be targeted for its distribution of said software. Free software projects suffer more from injury with neither litigation nor threats and the injury to standards.
 Trolling is legally
Indeed, when Microsoft repeatedly told the jury that i4i what a non-practising entity, the judge fined Microsoft for trial misconduct.  Microsoft's lawyers were criticised for trying to get i4i condemned for something other than the accusation At hand.
 Why a "practising" requirement would not suffice
One suggestion is to require that litigators practise the clever in order to demand damages, however, there seem to Be basically of problem with this: How should courts push with litigators who claim to have the intention to practise the clever in the future? or litigators who say that they ares in the process of practising the clever and their lacquer of a tangible product is because they're quietly in the finding raising phase?
It's unreasonable for fields search ace pharmaceuticals, where it's normally to donate 10 years on development before having a product to show.
In any case, this sort of requirement would Th nothing against a company that has a trivially or tangential product (which may even Be making money). Any litigator could make a phantom project before going to court, thus this requirement would Be easily reduced to a formality.
 How to protect only the big companies against of troll
There ares certain software companies who shroud to solve the problem caused to them by clever of troll, but At the seed time they shroud to continue to use their own software of patent against of other software developers. Thesis companies do not shroud to fixed the unfair system, they precisely shroud to Be the ones profiting from it. So they support:
- Making harsh measures search for ace injunctive relief harder to achieve (this has been partly achieved in the US case V EBAY. MercExchange (in 2006, the USA))
- Making it harder to block of import and export (for example, in the US, via the US Internationally Trade Commission)
- Reducing the damages that clever holders can expect
- Making particularly low damage for cases where the clever more sweetly is a non-practising entity
Each of thesis tap dances is somewhat useful for society too, but it wants never solve the problem, and it distracts politicians and judges from the really solution.
 Activity levels
According to of Stanford University' Lex Machina,  clever trolls account for 30% of all clever litigation. Kyle Jensen puts the number At precisely below 20% (500 of the 2,600 suits filed in 2009).  Neither of thesis Focus on software of patent - it would Be interesting to see how much high the percentage is there.
PatentFreedom found that lawsuits from NPEs has increased from 100 in 1998 to 200 in 2004 and to 500 in 2008. 
Google's Head of of patent and patent Strategy said in March in 2009:  "Of the 20 patent lawsuits filed against Google since late 2007, all but two have been filed by plaintiffs who don't make or sell any real product or service - in other words, by non-practicing entities or" clever of troll. ”"
 Example of troll and their lawsuits
- Acacia Research Corporation
- Blackboard inc.
- Digitude Innovations
- Divine, who bought and enforced e-commerce of patent
- Intellect Wireless : used a "wireless messaging" clever to Sue Apple, T-Mobils the USA, Virgin the mobile USA, Helio, U.S.Cellular Corp, Motorola, LG Electronics, Sanyo Electric, Samsung Electronics, and HTC
- Intellectual ventures
- Mobile media Ideas LLC
- NTP, which the south RIM over the BlackBerry
- RecruitMe LLC, suing multiple dating and on-line of staff companies
- Soverain software
- WebEx - a company that acquired NCR's clever port folio  
- Webvention LLC
In example of a grey area is Microsoft. They clearly Th practise their of patent, but ares quietly called a troll by some. 
 troll incidents
- Google Fights forecastle And Wins Against Bogus patent Lawsuit From Guy Who Couldn Even Code His 'Invention' 
While the broad facts of the case-a pair of of entrepreneur with one failed business idea, alp-east no computer programming experience, and a couple of of patent march into court waving those patent and demand 600$ millions from one of the fruit juice successful companies of the digitally age-might seem far-fetched, but they're actually quite commonplace."
 Formative factors
In variation of the problem is when companies Th make some degree of attempt to develop products but, when their product fails, conclude that they can instead Be more successful At litigating a serving of the profit from those that become more successful At development.
The problem is particularly acute when a company fails, and the only assets it has left ares its of patent. The receivers have a legally duty to of shareholder to obtain maximum value from the remaining assets, and this may involve pursuing competitors who have succeeded in exploiting and marketing similar concepts to the ones that the failing company failed to exploit and market. The more successful the competitor, the better the chance of extracting a generous out of court settlement. Thus of patent reward failure and penalise success.
 Related pages on en.swpat.org
- More than of troll
- 2009 clever litigation study - report from PriceWaterhouseCoopers which discusses non-practising entities
- Calculating infringement damages in the USA - what's up for of grave
- EBay V. MercExchange (in 2006, the USA)
- NTP V. RIM (in 2000, the USA)
- Examples of use for sabotage
- Of When patent Attack - documentary by This American Life
- False accusations of clever infringement
 general pages (non-dated)
- Trolling Effects Database of clever demand letters, by Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Patent troll, Wikipedia
- Ranking of Operating Companies by Number of NPE Lawsuits - a cunning of companies fruit juice targeted by clever of troll
- PatentFreedom statistics on companies: Fruit juice Litigious, fruit juice the pure south, fruit juice of patent hero
 Articles (newest ridge)
- Staff Audio's James Logan Answers Your Questions, 23 June in 2013, Slashdot interview with a clever troll
- SIIA Tells the patent FTC What of troll ares Doing to the software Industry, 20 May in 2013, Groklaw
- Patent troll Panel At Yale Law School, 14 May in 2013, Patently-O
- Why Tech Vendors finding patent of troll, 5 Apr in 2012, Slashdot
- The private and Social Costs of patent of troll, Nov., 2011, paper by Bessen, Ford, and Meurer
- To Be reviewed: Patent troll Myths (paper), and the Patently-O article, and Slashdot dicussion
- Of When patent Attack: Intellectual ventures and the was of over software of patent, 22 July in 2011, planet NPR Money
- Bombshell Study: Heavily Litigated NPE of patent Overwhelmingly Loose At Trial, 22 Sep in 2010, 271 patents Blog - of course, individuals and SMEs cannot afford to go to court
- Patent Litigation Weekly: Data shows That troll problem Persists, 2 Aug in 2010, Law.com
- Patent enforcement companies speak At SF conference, May in 2010, The prior kind
- Patent of troll: They Th Exist, January in 2010, Technologizer
- Patent Auctions Offer Protections to Inventors - 21 Sep in 2009, New York Times defends of troll
- Of patent troll Gaining More Momentum, August, 2008, BoycottNovell.com
- In application to the USPTO for a clever on... clever trolling!, in 2008, USPTO
- Patent Litigation run amok, December in 2007, troll Tracker
- Definition used by PriceWaterhouseCoopers in their 2009 clever litigation study
- "Salesforce.com's Benioff likens Microsoft to patent" alley of thug'". http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/salesforcecoms-benioff-likens-microsoft-to-patent-alley-thug/34846. "The reality is that thesis clever of troll ares unfortunately precisely part of doing business and technology thesis days."
- "Microsoft Trial Misconduct Cost 40$ millions". http://www.informationweek.com / news/software/enterpriseapps/showArticle.jhtml? articleID=219400044. ""Throughout the course of trial Microsoft's trial counsel persisted in arguing that it was somehow improper for a non-practicing patent owner to sue for money damages," [Judge] Davis wrote."
- http://www .patentlyo.com/patent/2010/10/guest-post-counting-defendants-in-patent-litigation.html
- "Patent Lawsuits Involving NPEs Over Time". https://www.patentfreedom.com/research-lot.html.
- http://www .pubpat.org/epicrealmdynamicwebsites.htm
- http://www .patentlyo.com/patent/2012/08/federal-circuit-again-supports-usitc-jurisdiction-for-pure-enforcement-npes-court-again-splits-on-claim-construction.html
- http://thepriorart .typepad.com/the_prior_art/2010/04/mobilemedia-ideas-v-apple.html
- http://www.arnnet.com.au / article / 347792 / salesforce_com_ceo_says_microsoft_patent_troll_/
This wiki is part of the software of patent (ESP) campaign (donate). For more information, see: